Re: [Patents] newsscan: Software patent limits 'go too far'

[old.timer@tiscali.co.uk]

But patents are supposed to be about protecting concepts, regardless of
any specific implementation. If the underlying idea is a patentable invention,
why should others be able to steal that invention if they use a computer
program, but not if they use any other means?

>-- Original Message --
>James Heald wrote:

I would like to second this.

The proposed EU parliament test for "technical" would allow an new algorithm
for FGPA layout to be patentable if it had a physical effect -- perhaps
a new way to reduce capacitative coupling for example.

But the program itself laid out on the FGPA should not be patentable.  The
specific implementation should be defended by copyright.  But there is no
economic case for allowing the sequence of the abstract data processing
to be monopolised by patent.

All best,

    James.